Agent team coordination

Multi-Agent Council — Agent Team Coordination

Production-grade multi-agent coordination using real subagent spawning via Task(), deterministic CLI for all structural operations, and file-based handoffs between agents. Each agent runs in its own fresh 200k context. The orchestrator stays lean (~10-15% context usage).

Iron Law

Every council operation that touches file naming, numbering, state transitions,
or validation MUST go through the planning-tools CLI. Agents execute —
the CLI manages structure.

This is non-negotiable. LLMs cannot reliably handle sequential numbering, state machine transitions, or structural validation. The CLI does this deterministically. Agents focus on what LLMs are good at: reasoning, writing, and analysis.

When to Use

Activate council coordination when:

• Task spans 3+ files or 2+ systems
• Task requires research before implementation
• Task benefits from independent specialist perspectives
• Context would exceed 50% for a single session
• User requests: "start a council", "use team mode", "team session"

Do NOT use when:

• Task is a single-file change with clear requirements
• Task is a quick bug fix with obvious cause
• User explicitly wants a single-session approach

Anti-Shortcut Rules

These are hard constraints. No exceptions without explicit user override.

#	Rule	Why
1	YOU CANNOT skip CLI commands and create council files manually	CLI enforces naming, numbering, and format. Manual creation causes state drift.
2	YOU CANNOT role-switch in a single session instead of spawning agents	Context burns fast, quality degrades, no isolation between perspectives.
3	YOU CANNOT advance state without a validated handoff	Unvalidated handoffs propagate errors to downstream agents.
4	YOU CANNOT skip quality gates (use --force only with user permission)	Gates catch 80% of handoff quality issues before they compound.
5	YOU CANNOT let agents communicate directly	All handoffs go through files. This is the ONLY reliable state transfer.
6	YOU CANNOT manually edit BOARD.md	Board is generated output. CLI regenerates it from state.

Common Rationalizations

Thought	Reality
"I can just role-play all agents in one session"	Context burns fast, quality degrades, no parallelism, no isolation
"File handoffs are unnecessary overhead"	They're the ONLY reliable state transfer between fresh contexts
"The CLI is unnecessary ceremony"	LLMs cannot reliably number files, validate structure, or manage state machines
"I'll skip the gate check — the handoff looks fine"	Gates catch structural issues your pattern-matching missed
"One long session is faster than spawning agents"	Fresh 200k contexts produce dramatically better output per agent
"I'll just create the message file myself"	You WILL get the numbering wrong eventually. The CLI won't.

Iron Questions

Before starting a council, answer these:

1. Is this actually complex enough for a council? (If a single session can handle it in <30% context, skip the council.)
2. Which preset fits? (Don't default to Full — most tasks need Rapid or Debug.)
3. Does a Memory Module exist? (If not, the first agent must be a mapper.)
4. What is the concrete deliverable? (Councils without clear objectives meander.)

Directory Structure

.planning/
├── MEMORY.md                    # Persistent cross-session memory
├── memory/                      # Memory Module (codebase intelligence)
│   ├── codebase-map.md
│   ├── database-schemas.md
│   ├── api-routes.md
│   ├── service-graph.md
│   ├── frontend-map.md
│   └── tech-stack.md
├── council/                     # Active council state
│   ├── STATE.md                # State machine (CLI-managed, never hand-edit)
│   ├── BOARD.md                # Task board (CLI-generated, never hand-edit)
│   ├── messages/               # Routing messages (CLI-created)
│   │   └── msg-001.md
│   ├── handoffs/               # Agent handoff documents (CLI-validated)
│   │   └── handoff-001-researcher.md
│   └── gates/                  # Gate check results (CLI-generated)
│       └── gate-001-research.md
└── decisions/DECISIONS.md       # Decision log

The Process

Phase 1: Council Initialization

# Initialize council with a preset
council init --preset full --objective "Implement user authentication system"

# Available presets: full, rapid, debug, architecture, refactoring, audit

This creates .planning/council/ with STATE.md, BOARD.md, and the agent sequence.

If no Memory Module exists (.planning/memory/ is missing or stale >48h):

# Spawn mapper agent to create Memory Module
Task("Map the codebase and create Memory Module files in .planning/memory/.
      Scan: project structure, database schemas, API routes, service dependencies,
      frontend components, tech stack. Write one file per category.")

Wait for mapper to complete before proceeding. Every subsequent agent needs this context.

Phase 2: Agent Execution Loop

For each agent in the preset sequence:

Step 1 — Create routing message:

council message --to researcher --task "Analyze authentication patterns in codebase" \
  --context "memory/api-routes.md,memory/service-graph.md"

The CLI creates messages/msg-NNN.md with proper numbering and format.

Step 2 — Spawn the agent:

Task("You are the RESEARCHER agent for this council.

READ these files:
- .planning/council/messages/msg-001.md (your assignment)
- .planning/memory/api-routes.md (context)
- .planning/memory/service-graph.md (context)

EXECUTE your research task as described in the message.

WRITE your findings to: .planning/council/handoffs/handoff-001-researcher.md

Your handoff MUST include these sections:
## Summary
## Findings
## Risks & Concerns
## Recommendations for Next Agent
## Files Examined")

Each agent gets a fresh 200k context. Pass file paths, not file contents.

Step 3 — Validate the handoff:

council handoff --validate handoff-001-researcher.md

CLI checks: file exists, required sections present, non-empty content.

Step 4 — Check quality gate:

council gate-check --phase research

CLI evaluates gate criteria for the current phase. Returns PASS or FAIL with reasons.

If gate fails:

# Option A: Respawn agent with feedback
council message --to researcher --task "Gate failed: missing risk analysis. Revise handoff."
# Then respawn agent...

# Option B: Force advance (requires user permission)
council advance --force --reason "User approved: risk analysis deferred to architect"

Step 5 — Advance state:

council advance

Moves state machine to next agent. Only works after gate passes (or --force).

Step 6 — Regenerate board:

council board

Rebuilds BOARD.md from current state. Shows completed phases, current agent, remaining work.

Repeat steps 1-6 for each agent in sequence.

Phase 3: Review & Synthesis

The final agent (always a reviewer) examines all previous handoffs:

Task("You are the REVIEWER agent for this council.

READ these files:
- .planning/council/messages/msg-NNN.md (your assignment)
- ALL files in .planning/council/handoffs/ (previous agent work)
- Relevant .planning/memory/ files

REVIEW all handoffs for:
- Completeness against the original objective
- Consistency between agents' recommendations
- Gaps or contradictions
- Quality of implementation (if executor was involved)

WRITE your review to: .planning/council/handoffs/handoff-NNN-reviewer.md

Include: ## Verdict (APPROVE / REVISE / REJECT), ## Issues Found, ## Final Recommendations")

After reviewer completes:

council handoff --validate handoff-NNN-reviewer.md
council gate-check --phase review
council advance  # Moves to COMPLETE state
council board    # Final board showing all phases done

Update persistent memory with council outcomes:

• Update .planning/MEMORY.md with decisions made
• Update .planning/memory/ if codebase structure changed
• Archive council if desired

Council Presets

Preset	Agents	Use When
Full (5)	researcher -> architect -> planner -> executor -> reviewer	Complex multi-module features, new systems
Rapid (3)	researcher -> executor -> reviewer	Small features with clear requirements
Debug (3)	investigator -> fixer -> verifier	Bug investigation, production issues
Architecture (3)	researcher -> architect -> reviewer	Design decisions, tech evaluation, RFC
Refactoring (4)	researcher -> planner -> executor -> reviewer	Large-scale refactoring, migrations
Audit (3)	researcher -> mapper -> reviewer	Codebase audit, security review, dependency analysis

Choosing a Preset

• Default to Rapid unless complexity justifies more agents.
• Use Full only when architecture decisions AND implementation are both needed.
• Use Debug for any bug that isn't immediately obvious.
• Use Architecture when the deliverable is a design document, not code.
• Use Refactoring when touching >10 files with structural changes.
• Use Audit when the goal is understanding, not changing.

Memory Module

The Memory Module lives in .planning/memory/ and provides codebase intelligence to every agent.

Files

File	Contains
codebase-map.md	Project structure, key directories, entry points
database-schemas.md	Tables, relationships, migrations
api-routes.md	Endpoints, methods, auth requirements
service-graph.md	Service dependencies, data flow
frontend-map.md	Components, pages, state management
tech-stack.md	Languages, frameworks, versions, tooling

Rules

• Created by mapper agent at council start if missing
• Refreshed if >48 hours old
• Passed to each agent as context file paths
• Updated after council if codebase structure changed
• Not every file is needed — pass only relevant ones to each agent

Quality Gates

Gates are checked by the CLI, not by LLM judgment.

Transition	Gate Criteria
Research -> Design	Findings documented, risks identified, alternatives compared
Design -> Planning	Architecture documented, interfaces defined, breaking changes noted
Planning -> Execution	Tasks are atomic (<30min each), dependencies explicit, acceptance criteria set
Execution -> Review	All tasks addressed, tests pass, no unresolved TODOs
Review -> Complete	Critical issues resolved, Memory Module updated if needed

Orchestrator Guidelines

The orchestrator (you, the main session) must stay lean:

• DO read handoffs to understand progress
• DO use CLI commands for all structural operations
• DO pass file paths to agents, not file contents
• DO keep your own context under 15% — let agents do the heavy lifting
• DON'T do agent work yourself — spawn a Task()
• DON'T hold agent outputs in your context — they're in files
• DON'T manually create or edit any file in .planning/council/

Spawning Agents Effectively

Good agent prompt structure:

Task("You are the [ROLE] agent for this council.

READ: [list of file paths]
EXECUTE: [clear description of what to do]
WRITE: [exact output file path]
FORMAT: [required sections in output]")

Bad agent prompt:

Task("Look at the codebase and figure out what needs to happen for auth.")

Be specific. Agents have fresh contexts — they know nothing except what you tell them.

Red Flags

Stop and reassess if you observe:

Red Flag	What's Wrong
Single session handling multiple agent roles	You're role-switching, not spawning. Quality will degrade.
Manual file creation in .planning/council/	CLI exists for a reason. State will drift.
No handoff validation between agents	Garbage in, garbage out. Validate before advancing.
Orchestrator context >50%	You're doing agent work. Spawn instead.
Agents referencing work without file paths	Hallucination risk. Always pass explicit paths.
Skipping gate checks	You're trusting vibes over structure.
BOARD.md manually edited	Board is generated output. Use council board.

Error Recovery

Issue	Recovery
Agent produces empty/garbage handoff	Respawn with clearer instructions and more context files
Gate check fails	Read failure reason, fix handoff or --force with user permission
STATE.md corrupted	council init --recover rebuilds from handoffs/ and messages/
Memory Module stale	Spawn mapper agent to refresh before continuing
Agent stuck on wrong task	New routing message with correction, respawn agent
Council objective changed mid-flight	council update --objective "new objective", reassess remaining agents

Integration

• Uses: persistent-memory (Memory Module creation and updates), systematic-debugging (debug preset), codebase-mapping (mapper agent)
• Feeds into: executing-plans (executor agent output), verification-before-completion (reviewer agent output)
• CLI dependency: planning-tools must be available for all council commands

Quick Reference

# Full lifecycle
council init --preset rapid --objective "Add rate limiting to API"
council message --to researcher --task "..." --context "memory/api-routes.md"
# [spawn researcher via Task()]
council handoff --validate handoff-001-researcher.md
council gate-check --phase research
council advance
council board
council message --to executor --task "..." --context "memory/api-routes.md,handoffs/handoff-001-researcher.md"
# [spawn executor via Task()]
council handoff --validate handoff-002-executor.md
council gate-check --phase execution
council advance
council board
council message --to reviewer --task "..." --context "handoffs/"
# [spawn reviewer via Task()]
council handoff --validate handoff-003-reviewer.md
council gate-check --phase review
council advance
council board
# Done — update MEMORY.md with outcomes